Our results demonstrated that S-O clip-assisted ESD is safe and fast for en bloc resection of large superficial colorectal tumors.

No abstract

UMIN-CTR UMIN000009112.

The present study showed that the overall PPB rate under the new guidelines was not significantly higher when compared with the previous data obtained before the new guidelines were introduced.

This study indicated that older patients and patients with large tumors were more likely to develop post-ESD fever, but there was a low probability that bacteremia was the cause of fever.

BackgroundThere are 3 methods of treating T1 colorectal cancer (T1 CRC), which include endoscopic resection, endoscopic resection followed by additional colorectal resection, and surgical resection. In this retrospective study, changes in the management of T1 CRC after introduction of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) were investigated by comparison with the 10-year period before introduction of ESD.Material/MethodsDuring a 20-year period from 1996 to 2015, 835 patients with T1 CRC were treated, including 331 patients before introduction of ESD (Group A) and 504 patients after introduction of ESD (Group B). Clinicopathological findings and treatment methods were compared between these 2 groups.ResultsAs the initial treatment, endoscopic treatment was performed in 185 patients (55.9%) in Group A and 288 (57.1%) in Group B. In Group B, ESD was performed in 161 patients (55.9%), accounting for more than half of the T1 CRC patients receiving endoscopic treatment. In Groups A and B, observation after endoscopic resection was selected for 54.2% and 67.3% of T1a patients, respectively (p=0.04). A similar trend was noted for T1b patients, and there was no significant difference of the treatment approach. Among all T1 CRC patients, the percentage undergoing observation after endoscopic resection was significantly higher in Group B than in Group A (34.3% vs. 26.9%, p=0.02), and the percentage of patients undergoing additional colorectal resection was significantly lower in Group B (22.8% vs. 29.0%, p=0.04).ConclusionsAfter introduction of ESD, it was performed in more than half of all patients with T1 CRC undergoing endoscopic treatment. The percentage of patients undergoing observation following endoscopic resection of T1 CRC increased after introduction of ESD.

Asymptomatic anisakiasis of the colon is a rare condition that is difficult to diagnose. A 42-year-old man with no symptoms was referred to our department because of elevated serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels detected previously at another hospital. A colonoscopy was performed to find the reason for these elevated CEA levels, and Anisakis larvae were identified by chance in the ascending colon wall. This is only the fourth case of asymptomatic anisakiasis of the colon to be reported worldwide.

BackgroundBowel preparation is an important factor for an optimal outcome of colonoscopy. Recently, polyethylene glycol (PEG) solution has been in common use for bowel cleansing for colonoscopy, but some patients are intolerant of PEG because of taste or volume. A low-volume PEG administered with ascorbic acid solution (PEG-Asc) was designed to improve tolerability, but the administration of this method is more complex than that with PEG alone. This study aimed to compare bowel cleansing efficacy, safety, and tolerability of 1 L PEG-Asc with a 2 L PEG preparation with use of sennosides and mosapride.Material/MethodsThis was a prospective, single-center, non-inferiority trial that included 112 patients (PEG-Asc group, 68; PEG group, 44). The primary endpoint was the efficacy of colon cleansing assessed by endoscopists using a validated 4-point scale according to the Aronchick scale and was verified by a blinded investigator. Acceptability, tolerability, and adenoma detection rate (ADR) of these 2 regimens were secondary endpoints.ResultsWe found no statistically significant differences between the groups in colon-cleansing efficacy or in the adenoma detection rate (ADR). Moreover, overall, patients significantly favored PEG-Asc over PEG, reflecting better acceptance of PEG-Asc. Additionally, more patients favored PEG-Asc over PEG for a hypothetical future colonoscopy.ConclusionsThe alternate 1 L PEG-Asc regimen and standard 2 L PEG regimen were clinically equivalent with respect to cleansing efficacy, safety, and ADR, and more patients favored PEG-Asc than PEG. This alternate regimen may improve patient compliance and acceptance of surveillance colonoscopy.